Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff considers homosexuality to be immoral

i think that to whatever degree you are homophobic, it has nothing to do with god. however, i think you use biblical precedent to continue your prejudice without feeling horrible about it.

 

can we accept this definition for homophobic?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/homophobic

ho·mo·pho·bi·a /ˌhoʊməˈfoʊbiə/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[hoh-muh-foh-bee-uh] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun unreasoning fear of or antipathy toward homosexuals and homosexuality


assuming we can agree on that definition...why do you feel i'm homophobic?

are you homophobic to any degree?

 

from wiki:

Homophobia is the unreasoning fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals. It can also mean hatred, hostility, or disapproval of homosexual people, sexual behavior, or cultures, and is generally used to insinuate bigotry. The term homophobic means "prejudiced against homosexual people," and a person who is homophobic is a homophobe.


^this is better i think. and as you would say that nobody is without sin, i would say that nobody is without fear.

 

so you're fearful of homosexuals?

 

c'mon max. am i that difficult to understand or have i just lost my texas accent? i'm saying that i would not claim to be free of prejudice, only that i no more fear homosexuality than being mugged, getting in an auto accident, etc. i think you fear the gay man more than i, that's what i'm saying.

 

and i don't understand why you think that of me.

again..i think there's a lot of projection in this thread. projection of what people think i believe because i'm a Christian...or projection of the way I see the world based on how others see the world.

 

And I think he's telling you that you are wrong. Why do you feel the need to reduce his motivations to some base weakness that you can laugh at? Has he done or said anything that would make you think he hides secret fear and loathing? If so, please link it and I will apologize. If not why are you intentionally slandering one of the most reflective posters here for no good reason?

I just deleted several paragraphs. It should suffice to say this sincerely pisses me off. Sincerely. It also suggests to me that you are either Trader_Jorge-like in your will at all costs use of disingenuous arguments, or too insecure with your own positions to deal with the cognitive dissonance created when people have opinions which are honest and legitimate but that don't match yours or too lazy to actually think about what you are saying.

Seriously, the only reasons that I can imagine why you might make an argument like this are meanness, stupidity, or laziness. I can think of nothing more craven and weak than this slanderous style of character assassination debate.

 

Wow. Having been on a hiatus from viewing this forum has allowed me to avoid complete crap like this Bill HIcks character. Perhaps I should remain a lurker.

Also, have we really hit the point where people are claiming that Wikipedia is a better source for the definition of a word than the dictionary? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!

 

Welcome to Clutchfans D&D.

Here, you're either a terrorist or a chickenhawk.

You're either gay or you're a homophobe in disguise (who is also gay).

You're either a god-hating leftist or you're a Jesus freak who hates everyone who doesn't agree with you.

You're either an American-hating librul or you're a racist and intolerant bushbot.

Here, there is no middle ground.

 

Just to point out that at one time being left handed was a moral issue.

 

Well I think this really speaks to how difficult this issue is and most issues regarding faith. MadMax and Rhester are certainly very reflective and I get the feeling they are wrestling with the issue themselves. What it sounds like thegary and ShakeYohipsYao are doing is to press them into offering a rational justification for their views, possibly looking to rip the a new one on it but I don't want to presume too much as my presumption plate is already pretty full.

As I mentioned earlier though this is fruitless as not sharing their faith how we can demand them to justify it to us. I hate to say a debate is over but I think we're at a dead end. I think we should accept that Mad Max and Rhester have a belief that many of us don't agree on and don't understand but they aren't acting on it in any hostile way.

 

wow. i don't think that i said anything to max that is worse than what ottomaton projected onto me. i have a huge problem with the hijacked version of christianity that masquerades as morality. homophobia is the same thing as racism, this is all i'm saying. the reason it is still acceptable to persecute gays and lesbians is due to biblical precedence. rationally it is not possible for a civilized society to deny them equal rights forever. i know max is a refective christian, that's why i'm asking him to think about why he struggles with the issue. religion evolves, as does everything. he's someone who can make a difference. i don't know what your deal is otto, but i suggest you put me on ignore.

 

The difference is you earned it through your slanderous accusations (Max's ethical issues weren't legitimate and could only be homophobia) with while Max did nothing to earn your attack other than express his legitimate beliefs.

BTW if I use ignore, I enable people who are prone to it to make slanderous comments like this without response, at least from me. This is why I don't use the ignore list. If you can't stand being held responsible for your own words, put me on ignore.

 

I was about to post that you were right, and that what Hicks said wasn't funny at all, as well as very offensive. (hopefully taken out of context, but you never know) Then I read this...

And while I can understand why some people feel that way, in my opinion it's just as broad and exaggerated as what you're complaining about.



D&D. Finger Food.

 

first of all, i don't think max asked for you to be his knight in shining armor.

secondly, i slandered no one.

lastly, who are you to hold me responsible for anything? back off.

 

It isn't about him. It is about whether you can call someone homophobic because you don't agree with them.

Yes you did. What you did is no different than Trader_Jorge accusing people who are against the war in Iraq of hating America, or being pro al Qaeda.

I'm the person who had to read your slander and was offended.

No.

 

i'm laughing at you now, get a grip.

 

Whow, take a step back, brother. The guys in the front of the crowd are starting to look a little bug-eyed.

This post is just as vitriolic as my initial posts, for which I have appologized. Looks like I've progressed, while you've digressed.

Try actually engaging in the argument rather than getting defensive.

 

Exposed again!

Why are you even in this debate if you don't have an opinion on the matter! You are the ultimate moving target.

 

sorry max, i got detained by the hall monitor. to get back to your question, i doubt, as a rule, you would ever treat anyone poorly based on race, gender or sexual orientation. just want you to correct me if i'm wrong in thinking that you think that homosexuals have something wrong with them. i want to know what you struggle with in this regard. if i am offending you, it's not my intention. i really want to know. it seems very unchristian to persecute a whole group like that. i know you are not doing it but the hijackers are and i would think someone like yourself, who resents their bastardization of your religion, would want to speak out against issues like this.